The 2nd APLAC/PTB Proficiency Testing Training Course ... · 08.00 Registration 08.30 ... workshop,...

Asia Pacific Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (APLAC) Physikalisch‐Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB), Germany Bureau of Accreditation (BoA), Vietnam

The 2nd APLAC/PTB Proficiency Testing Training Course & Workshop 11 – 13 September 2007, Melia Hanoi Hotel, Hanoi, Vietnam

The 2nd APLAC/PTB Proficiency Testing Training Course & Workshop 11 – 13 September 2007, Melia Hanoi Hotel, Vietnam

Table of Contents

List of Abbreviations .......................................................................................................................3

1. INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................................4 2. SYMPOSIUM ON ‘ACCREDITATION FOR GLOBAL TRADE AND CONSUMER PROTECTION’.......4 3. PARTICIPANTS OF THE 2ND PT TRAINING COURSE /PLANNING WORKSHOP ..........................5 4. PT TRAINING COURSE & WORKSHOP DESIGN AND PROGRAM................................................6 5. THE 2nd PT TRAINING COURSE & WORKSHOP PROCESS AND RESULTS....................................9

Day 1: 11 September 2007 ......................................................................................................9

Day 2: 12 September 2007 ....................................................................................................10

Presentation of the Lessons Learnt .....................................................................................10

Training Module 1 and 2: How to Run a PT Program?.......................................................15

PT Training Workshop Feedback at the End of Day 2 .........................................................17

Day 3: 13 September 2007 ....................................................................................................19

Presentation of the results of the discussion of 4 sub‐groups ...........................................19

Training Module 3: Basic Program Statistics ......................................................................25

Planning of National / Regional PT Programs .....................................................................26

Homework and Future Steps ...............................................................................................29

6. COURSE & WORKSHOP EVALUATION .....................................................................................31

ANNEX (in separate file)

ANNEX 1: LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

ANNEX 2: HOMEWORK FROM THE 1ST PT TRAINING WORKSHOP ON ‘ASSESSMENT OF NATIONAL NEEDS AND PRIORITIES FOR PT PROGRAMS

ANNEX 3: OPERATIONAL PLAN FOR PT PROGRAMS

ANNEX 4: EXAMPLES OF SURVEY FORMS FOR PT PROVIDERS

2 | P a g e

The 2nd APLAC/PTB Proficiency Testing Training Course & Workshop 11 – 13 September 2007, Melia Hanoi Hotel, Vietnam List of Abbreviations

AB Accreditation Body

APLAC Asia Pacific Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation

BoA Bureau of Accreditation (Vietnam)

CNAS China National Accreditation Service for Conformity Assessment

DISM Department of Intellectual Property, Standardization and Metrology (Laos)

DMSc Department of Medical Sciences (Thailand)

DSS Department of Science Service (Thailand)

HKAS Hong Kong Accreditation Service

KAN National Accreditation Body of Indonesia (Komite Akreditasi Nasional)

KICM Korean Institute of Construction Materials

KOLAS Korea Laboratory Accreditation Scheme

MS&TRD Myanmar Scientific and Technological Research Department

NABL National Accreditation body for Testing & Calibration Laboratories (India)

NATA National Association of Testing Authorities (Australia)

NBSM Nepal Bureau of Standards and Metrology

PNAC Pakistan National Accreditation Council

PT Proficiency Testing

PTA Proficiency Testing Australia

PTB Physikalisch‐Technische Bundesanstalt (Germany)

SAC Singapore Accreditation Council

SM Standards Malaysia

TAF Taiwan Accreditation Foundation

TISI Thai Industrial Standards Institute

TLAS Thai Laboratory Accreditation Scheme

3 | P a g e


1. INTRODUCTION The APLAC/PTB Proficiency Testing Training course & workshop was the second of a series of 3 workshops planned to enhance capabilities of accreditation bodies or organizations in similar role in developing the provision of proficiency testing schemes. The workshop was jointly organized by the Asia Pacific Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (APLAC), the Physikalisch‐Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB), and the Bureau of Accreditation (BoA), Vietnam during 11 – 13 September 2007 at the Melia Hanoi Hotel, Vietnam. The first APLAC/PTB PT Training course & workshop was organized on 13‐15 February 2007 at the Regent Hotel, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The host country organization was Standards Malaysia. The event was composed of 2 main parts: a symposium and a training course & workshop. The symposium was organized for half day of the 11th September 2007 on ‘Accreditation for Global Trade and Consumer Protection’. It was followed by the 2 ½ day PT training course & workshop. The APLAC/PTB Proficiency Testing Training Course & Workshop has 3 specific objectives, which are.

1. To develop and operate within their own organization proficiency testing programs which meet the needs of their participating laboratories and fulfill the requirements of ISO/IEC Guide 43;

2. To coordinate international inter‐laboratory comparisons; 3. To plan proficiency testing schemes according to the needs in their economy

identified before the workshop. 2. SYMPOSIUM ON ‘ACCREDITATION FOR GLOBAL TRADE AND CONSUMER PROTECTION’ The symposium was organized mainly for the participants from the host country and the PT training course & workshop to take advantage of the presence of some international expertise in Vietnam and to offer some wider exposure for the national accreditation body, Bureau of Accreditation (BoA). It was chaired by Mr. Vu Xuan Thuy ‐ Director of the Bureau of Accreditation (BoA) and Dr. Ulrich Diekmann, Project Coordinator of PTB. It comprised six key note presentations highlighting the importance of the Quality Infrastructure in general and of the Accreditation in particular. The key notes were presented by six well recognized speakers from Vietnam, Thailand, Germany, and Australia. The agenda of the symposium is illustrated below.

4 | P a g e


AGENDA OF THE SYMPOSIUM

“Accreditation for Global Trade and Consumer Protection” 08.00 Registration 08.30 Opening Remarks

- Mr. Vu Xuan Thuy ‐ Director of the Bureau of Accreditation (BoA) - Dr. Ulrich Diekmann – Representative of PTB

09.00 National Quality Infrastructure ‐ Support to Accreditation Dr. Clemens Sanetra – PTB Expert

09.30 Development of the International Accreditation System Mr. John Gilmour ‐ former ILAC and APLAC chair

10.00 Tea Break 10.15 Accreditation in Vietnam with global trade

Mr. Vu Xuan Thuy – Director of Bureau of Accreditation (BoA) 10.45 Laboratories Accreditation in Health Sector

Dr. Panadda Silva – QA Director of Department of Medical Sciences (DMSc, Thailand)

11.15 Activities of Vietnam Metrology Institute Toward the Global Trade Dr. Tran Quang Uy – QM of Vietnam Metrology Institute (VMI)

11.45 Proficiency Testing ‐ A Measure to Improve Laboratory Performance Mr. Philip Briggs ‐ General Manager of Proficiency Testing Australia (PTA)

12.15 Q & A 12.30 Lunch 3. PARTICIPANTS OF THE 2nd PT TRAINING COURSE & WORKSHOP Twenty‐seven participants from fifteen economies and five resource persons participated in the second PT training workshop1. Twelve economies (eight participants) out of fifteen economies (twenty‐seven participants) participated in the first workshop. Ten economies, that participated in the first PT training workshop, did not participate in the second workshop, namely Bangladesh, Bhutan, Cambodia, Japan, Mexico, Mongolia, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Sri Lanka, and USA. Pakistan, Hong Kong China, and Myanmar were new economies for the second PT training workshop.

1 List of Participants is in ANNEX 1.

5 | P a g e

The 2nd APLAC/PTB Proficiency Testing Training Course & Workshop 11 – 13 September 2007, Melia Hanoi Hotel, Vietnam 4. PT TRAINING COURSE & WORKSHOP DESIGN AND PROGRAM The PT training course & workshop was designed to integrate both theory and practical experiences. The first PT training workshop focused on the general knowledge from experts and the group discussions on the PT scheme. More details of the course content of the 1st and 2nd PT training workshops are illustrated in picture 1 below. At the end of the 1st PT training workshop, the participants were assigned a homework to implement before the 2nd PT training workshop. The homework was ‘the Assessment of National Needs and Priorities for PT Programs’. A Guide for the assessment of national needs and priorities for PT programs was introduced at the end of the 1st workshop by Mr. John Gilmour, PTB expert. The results of the national needs and priorities of each economy2 were presented by each economy in the first session of the 2nd PT training workshop. The participants, then, had an opportunity to review the process of the assessment of the national needs and priorities and to draw lessons learnt from the practical process. The lessons learnt gathered from the participants will be a basis to form a practical guideline for other economies that did not participate in the APLAC/PTB PT training workshops. The lessons learnt are recorded under Chapter 5 ‘THE 2nd PT TRAINING COURSE & WORKSHOP PROCESS AND RESULTS – Day 2’. The 2nd PT training workshop focused on how to plan PT programs consisting of training modules and interactive sessions in small groups for discussion. The course part was on the Selection of PT Programs, Program Design, Sample Preparation and Packaging, and Basic Program Statistics. The group session mainly focused on How to Plan a PT program considering the different steps to take to run a PT program, and on developing operational plans for PT programs. The homework assigned during the 2nd PT training workshop was the implementation of the PT programs identified according to national/regional needs. Each economy participates in a PT program from the planning stage (during the 2nd training workshop), the implementation stage (in between the 2nd and the 3rd training workshop) and reporting of the implementation results (during the 3rd training workshop). The duration between the 2nd and the 3rd PT training workshop will be approximately one year. Meanwhile, a follow‐up scheme will be established to monitor the PT program implementation. The results of the PT program implementation will be reported and lessons learnt will be drawn in the 3rd PT training workshop.

2 Results of the ‘Assessment of National Needs and Priorities for PT Programs’ are in ANNEX 2.

6 | P a g e


Picture 1: Illustration of PT Training course & workshop Design

Workshop 1

Workshop 2

Workshop 3

7 | P a g e

The 2nd APLAC/PTB Proficiency Testing Training Course & Workshop 11 – 13 September 2007, Melia Hanoi Hotel, Vietnam Below is the 2nd PT training course & workshop program.

Time TUESDAY Day 1: 11.09.2007

WEDNESDAY Day 2: 12.09.2007

THURSDAY Day 3: 13.09.2007

9:00 – 10:30

SYMPOSIUM on Importance of Quality Infrastructure

2

nd plenary session

Presentation of homework Summary and discussion of results

Group presentations

10:30 – 10:50 BREAK 10:50 – 12:45

SYMPOSIUM on Importance of Quality Infrastructure

Training module 1 How to run a PT scheme? Types of PT programs Selection of programs Program design International requirements and practical experience

Training module 3 Basic program statistics - z-score - En ratio PT reporting requirements - case studies Planning of national / regional PT programs

12:45 – 1:30 LUNCH 1:30 – 3:00

Introduction to workshop 1

st plenary session

Presentation of homework on the assessment of national needs and priorities for PT

Training module 2 How to run a PT scheme? Introduction to - artifact stability - sample homogeneity - packaging and handling

Planning of national / regional PT programs

3:00 – 3:30 BREAK 3:30 – 5:00

Break-out session Lessons learnt from the process of assessing the needs and priorities

Break-out session How to plan a PT program?

Break-out session Planning of national/ regional PT programs Future steps Homework Program implementation

8 | P a g e

The 2nd APLAC/PTB Proficiency Testing Training Course & Workshop 11 – 13 September 2007, Melia Hanoi Hotel, Vietnam 5. THE 2nd PT TRAINING COURSE & WORKSHOP PROCESS AND RESULTS

Day 1: 11 September 2007

The 2nd PT training course & workshop started at 13.30 hrs. until 17.00 hrs. of the 11th September 2007. Three main sessions were covered during the first day. Introduction to the Workshop The moderator welcomed the participants and asked the participants to introduce themselves briefly. Nineteen out of twenty‐seven participants were new in this workshop. Mr. Philip Briggs as the key expert and as the Chair of the APLAC Proficiency Testing Committee gave a short overview on the concept of the PT training course & workshop, covering the course objectives, its design and program. The moderator introduced the approach of the training workshop and the materials used. Presentation of Homework At the conclusion of the Kuala Lumpur workshop, the participants were asked to complete an exercise to gather information on proficiency testing activities in their economies. The exercise was the ‘Assessment of National Needs and Priorities for PT Programs’. The results of these surveys were presented at the commencement of the Hanoi workshop. Not all participants responded. Nine out of twenty‐two economies from the 1st PT training workshop responded. They were Australia, China, India, Malaysia, Papua New Guinea, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Thailand, and Vietnam. No representatives from Papua New Guinea and Sri Lanka attended the 2nd PT training workshop. The results showed a much greater level of PT activity than had been anticipated. The results of the ‘Assessment of National Needs and Priorities for PT Programs’ are in ANNEX 2. Lessons Learnt from the Process of Assessing PT Needs and Priorities The essence of the homework on the ‘Assessment of National Needs and Priorities for PT Programs’ was not only to learn about the national PT needs and priorities but also to learn from the process of assessing and prioritizing the needs. The workshop was attempted to capture those lessons learnt with the aim of using them as a practical guideline for other economies on the same process. The participants were asked to split into 4 sub‐groups to discuss the following questions.

What did you do in the PT needs assessment and prioritization? What was positive about the process you have employed? What would you have done differently if you have to assess and prioritize the PT needs again? Why?

9 | P a g e


If you have to select 2 priority areas for PT scheme, what would you choose? Why?

The results of the discussion were presented on the second day of the workshop.


Presentation of the Lessons Learnt Since most participants in each sub‐group did not go through the process of assessing the PT needs and priorities, the discussion of some groups focused on sharing experiences of the group members. The lessons learnt discussed in 4 sub‐groups were presented and recorded below.

Group 1 Group Members: Trang, Mya Mya, Sugeng, Tien Ling, Rachada, Viengthong, Stephen Lo, Nhung Resource Person: Clemens Sanetra 1.1 What did you do in the PT needs assessment and prioritization?

• Search database on website to survey: o Kinds of industrial laboratories and accredited laboratories to select the priority

of PT needs o Number of PT providers o Government request o Public health issues o Local network (professionals, society, associations) o Consultants: small economy vs. large economy (may have different needs or

priorities) • Survey the level of PT knowledge in my country (developing country) and organize a

seminar on PT knowledge • Use database to select priority • [Has a] Existing database (from PT providers). Lead assessor did the assessment of needs

and priorities. • Criteria for prioritization

o Support government regulations o Major scope for the economy o ‘Hot’ issue

• [Has] Existing directory of accredited laboratories • For non‐accredited laboratories

o Questionnaire through associations o Link to non‐accredited laboratories through accredited laboratories

1.2 What was positive about the process you have employed?

• Having more laboratory information (needs, addresses, etc.) ….to plan PT‐ programs to support the laboratory needs and AB needs

10 | P a g e


• Easy to identify the accredited laboratories in database according to specified testing standards

• Perceiving the scale of the potential PT program(s) • The laboratories will know the PT benefits and improve lab’s quality. • Identifying the field of laboratories and their competence • Directory is easy to access and updated. • A lot of data can be collected from questionnaire (membership, company) but not specific

1.3 What would you have done differently if you have to assess and prioritize the PT needs again? Why?

• Send out ‘PT needs’ survey form • Organize a meeting with laboratories and PT providers to promote PT‐ program • Stimulate other PT providers to organize relevant PT program(s) e.g. training, education,

etc. • Under accreditation requirements, laboratories needs to participate in a PT program

(mandatory vs. voluntary approach) • Organize seminars by inviting speakers from ABs and PT providers • Use survey form • Organize PT or inter‐laboratory comparisons • Conduct National Quality Infrastructure Assessment for laboratory

1.4 If you have to select 2 priority areas for PT scheme, what would you choose? Why?

PT Area PT Program Reason Food safety Environment

• Pesticide and heavy metals • Waste water (BOD, COD) and air

pollution

• Food for export • Government

regulations Food Toy paint

• Antibiotics and pesticide residues

• Lead and other heavy metals

Molecular Diagnostics

• Infectious agents • Cancer genetics

Food safety Drugs

• Metals in food • Rubber

Water Food

• Waste water

• Sauce (VRE, 3‐MCPD)

• Environmental protection and the number of environmental labs

• Relating to health Drinking water Food

• Metals in drinking water

• Micro‐organisms in fish (microbiology)

• Government regulations

• Export

11 | P a g e


Group 2 Group Members: Pusadee, Hong, Zoe, Bella, Ji Chang Min, Farooq Resource Person: Philip Briggs 2.1 What did you do in the PT needs assessment and prioritization?

• [Count] Number of accredited laboratories – based on TISI/KOLAS websites. • Prioritization

o Export Yes – high (1) No – low (2‐4)

o Availability of PT provider o Public health and safety


• Targeted process made it easy – narrow focus of survey • Objective evidence for future planning

2.3 What would you have done differently if you have to assess and prioritize the PT

needs again? Why? • No major changes – happy with outcome • Circumstances [between] in economies are different. • One structured plan would not suit every economy. • Possibility of further categories e.g.

o Export products o Public health and safety


Organization PT Priority Area Reason TISI • EMC

• Construction • Regulation • No program

PNAC • Calibration • Food (pesticides)

• Traceability • Health

HKAS • Construction • Gem stones • Chinese medicine

• No program • Domestic • Domestic and safety

12 | P a g e


Group 3: Group Members: Venkateswaran, Ha, Siti, Patravee, Hieu, Robert, Sapkota Resource Person: John Gilmour 3.1 What did you do in the PT needs assessment and prioritization?

Background: All economies of the small group participants have PT programs, e.g. • Thailand (medical)

Centralized, free – commencing cost recovery Committee (government / expert laboratories) selects PT programs

• Malaysia – similar to Thailand

• India Conduct PT schemes required by APLAC and ISO 17025 CAP medical PT programs available

• How was data obtained? o Through surveys, questionnaires, discussion, workshops, and website

• Priorities based on needs and were influenced by o End user requests o Political climate o Regulatory requirements o Size of laboratories o Risk assessment (HIV, bird flu, blood banking)


• Raising awareness of laboratory accreditation • Centralizing of information • Improved end user feedback of needs • Provided communication enhancement with relevant agencies


needs again? Why? No change. 3.4 If you have to select 2 priority areas for PT scheme, what would you choose? Why? Individual economies have own priority e.g.

Economy PT Priority Areas Reason Malaysia • medical Nepal • pesticides Thailand • medical imaging

13 | P a g e


Group 4: Group Members: Edita, Yang, Duong, Quan, Bibin, Lee Ham Eng Resource persons: Panadda Silva and Ulrich Diekmann 4.1 What did you do in the PT needs assessment and prioritization?

• Fields of accreditation contacted for details of PT needs. • Using AB database. • Surveying of customers during assessment and sending questionnaire to

customers. Prioritization

• PT calibration is not available (importance for laboratory equipment) • Risk assessment

o Public safety including public health o Environmental issues

• Currently concerning matter • Number of laboratories – about 50% accredited laboratories is in the field of

chemical. • Export • Government requirements


• Knowing number of laboratories and the needs of laboratories in the fields. • Starting PT provider accreditation. • Knowing status of participation in PT of laboratories.


needs again? Why? • More detailed information to be collected such as details in specific fields, number

of laboratories, etc. • Collect information by website: www.boa.gov.vn • Easy to get information through website


Economy PT Priority Areas Reason Australia • Medical testing

• Water testing • Public health • Safety

Singapore • Food • Medical

• Food Safety • Public health

Vietnam • Food • Environmental measurements

• Safety, requirement of government, export, no laboratories

• Safety, requirement of government, no laboratories

14 | P a g e

http://www.boa.gov.vn/


Korea • Food

• Industrial field (automobile)

• Directly influence to human health

• Connected with export India • Food

• Water • Number of laboratories

(high number)

Training Module 1 and 2: How to Run a PT Program? Mr. Philip Briggs provided PT technical content on:

• Types of PT programs • Selection of PT programs • Program Design (international requirements and practical experience) • Introduction to artifact stability, sample homogeneity, packaging and handling

Details of the course content are in the Course Notes3 provided by the trainer.

3 The Course Notes was prepared by Mr. Philip Briggs, the Chair of the APLAC Proficiency Testing Committee, and was given to each participant as a reference for proficiency testing activities. The Course Notes includes all topics presented during the 1st and 2nd PT Training Course & Workshops.

15 | P a g e

The 2nd APLAC/PTB Proficiency Testing Training Course & Workshop 11 – 13 September 2007, Melia Hanoi Hotel, Vietnam How to Plan a PT Program?

In coming to a systematic approach of planning a PT program, the moderator brought the participants through a step‐by‐step flow diagram as shown below.

16 | P a g e

The 2nd APLAC/PTB Proficiency Testing Training Course & Workshop 11 – 13 September 2007, Melia Hanoi Hotel, Vietnam A key question after the PT needs and priorities are identified is ‘Should my organization run the PT program?’. If the answer is ‘Yes’, ‘What should my organization do in running a PT program?’. If the answer is ‘No’, then ‘How can my organization facilitate the provision of a suitable PT program?’ The participants were grouped into 4 sub‐groups as listed below. Sub‐group 1 and 2 were assigned to discuss steps for the question ‘How can my organization facilitate the provision of a suitable PT Program?’ and sub‐group 3 and 4 were assigned to discuss steps for the question ‘What should my organization do in running a PT program?’.

The results of the discussion in 4 sub‐groups were presented in the first session of Day 3.

PT Training Workshop Feedback at the End of Day 2 What I like about the 2nd PT training workshop so far?

• Sharing experiences /knowledge during group discussion (8 comments) • Sharing knowledge and experiences about running of a PT program

• Sharing of experiences, ideas and different stages of development in PT

• Exchange experiences, see different thinking, and afterwards, improve our procedure

• Experiences from different economies

17 | P a g e


• An opportunity was provided to understand the elements of PT process of different economies.

• Meeting people, sharing experiences • Providing an opportunity to meet people of economies and experience sharing

supplemented by rich experience of the trainer

• Well organized (2 comments) • Well presenter • Variety curriculum (international) • Discussion • Questions & answers • Working group participation • Good exposure • Cross‐discipline exposure is stimulating and educational • Well‐chosen resource persons • Structured content • Atmosphere to ask questions and practical examples during the course • Nothing specific • I like this workshop.

What should be improved tomorrow?

• Looking forward to the presentation tomorrow – to know the consideration for PT design

• It’s ok to do it this way – to have discussion. • Analysis with examples • Specific field PT – air pollution • More detailed preliminary information (at least an agenda of the workshop) • More knowledge sharing sessions by experts • Give more examples during presentation (not only theory) • More lecture with case studies regarding PT work • To share the knowledge of PT program • Interested in in‐depth technical analysis of PT results • Interrelating technical issues • Some discussion about the results of break‐out sessions might be needed. • For in‐depth coverage on the theory part • How can we evaluate the results of PT programs and PT providers? • Maximum information from one source regarding various information.

Participants’ detail circulation will be highly appreciated. • Hotel supporting training facilities inadequate • More information in lecture • That’s fine. • Nothing

18 | P a g e



Presentation of the results of the discussion of 4 sub‐groups Group 1: How can my organization facilitate the provision of a suitable PT program?

Contracting Out

Accrediting PT Providers

Facilitation of PT Programs Management of PT Programs

Options • Contracting to other

ABs • Contracting to PT

providers • Contracting to private

laboratories • Contracting out to

laboratories of associations – pathology association

• Contracting to NMI

• Establish accreditation scheme for PT provider accreditation

• Establish advisory committee (needs of PT analyzed)

• Advertise specifications of a PT provider (Program details, fee, etc.) on website

• Expression of interest (tendering) for conducting PT program

• Evaluation by AB • List of information of PT provider (EoI) advertised to laboratories

• Laboratory chooses PT provider for participating in PT program

• Facilitating organization facilitates PT programs

• Constitute technical committee for a PT program

• Select(competent) laboratory

• Design PT program by AB

• Execution by selected competent laboratory

• Analyze data and prepare draft report by AB

• Draft report scrutinized by technical committee (constituted earlier)

• Prepare final report and close the PT program

Group 2: How can my organization facilitate the provision of a suitable PT program? PT Program: Arsenic in Water Work Steps: Option 1:

1. Survey local PT provider for this particular program.

2. Select criteria according to ISO Guide 43. 2. Assess existing PT providers in terms of

competency and confidentiality, also cost. 2. Agree with the most appropriate PT provider

– establish working relationship. 3. Specify program technical requirements. 4. Award contract. 5. Monitor progress with scheduled reports. 5. Develop PT provider performance

quantitatively and evaluate periodically (give score).

5. Evaluate the PT provider’s performance by

General PT Process Design PT program (based on needs of

labs) Choose the criteria

Invite and establish technical committee

Return invitation

Purchase sample (sample provider)

Take sample (BOA technician + sample

provider) fixed sample

19 | P a g e


independent PT, participants’ feedback collection (periodically).

5. Continue approval or discontinue approval. 5. Encourage the other PT providers also to

enter in the agreement (motivation). Option 2:

1. No local PT provider. 2. Search for overseas PT providers. 3. If yes, repeat steps in option 1. 4. If no, no PT program.

Homogeneity testing

Distribute to the labs

Collect the results

Comment from technical adviser

Draft report

Final report

Group 3: What should my organization do in running a PT program? PT Program: Metals (Cd, Pb, As) in waste water (from industry)

1. Arrange human resources for the PT program (PT coordinators, Technical expert, etc.)

2. Define number of participating laboratories ( exam. 100 labs) 3. Design PT program

a. Range of concentration b. How to prepare sample i Using metal standard solution ii Preserved with 5% HNO3

iii Uniform samples (sample A and sample B) volume = 200mL for each bottle c. Statistical design….assigned value , evaluation of lab ‐ performance

4. Distribute invitation letters to participants, which includes information on the types of sample (metals in water), range of concentration (less than 5.0 ppm), costs, timeframes etc.

5. Prepare samples (contract out) a. Purchase standard As, Pb, Cd (1,000 mg/L), PE bottles (250 ml), and

materials for labeling and packing b. Calculate the total sample volume (for 100 labs, homogeneity and stability

testing, surplus samples for transportation‐ accident, lab‐accident etc.)…total about 60 litres

c. Calculate volume of standard As, Pb, Cd in water d. Mixing … pretest for concentration and homogeneity. e. Subdivided samples ... about 200 ml in PE bottles f. Labeling

6. Conduct homogeneity testing a. Random sampling 10 bottles b. Send to test by AB‐lab (ISO 17025)

7. Prepare documents for participants a. Instructions to participants b. Result sheet

8. Pack sample with documents and distribute them to participating labs

20 | P a g e


9. Conduct stability testing (at the same time that was planned for the end of testing by participating labs).

a. Random sampling 5 bottles b. Send to test by AB‐ lab (ISO 17025)

10. Evaluate labs’ results a. Collect labs’ results b. Transfer to computer c. Check and analyze data d. Evaluate labs’ performance

11. Getting comments of the evaluation results from technical advisers 12. Prepare draft reports and get them approved by PT advisory board 13. Prepare and distribute final report to participants

Group 4: What should my organization do in running a PT program?

Group 4 – groupwork presentation

21 | P a g e


Group Introduction

Resource PersonDr. Panadda Silva

Group membersDr. Robert Collins, Hong KongDr. Patravee Soisangwan, ThailandSugeng Saharjo, IndonesiaJi Chang Min, KoreaTran Thu Ha, VietnamSiti Mariam Mohd Din, Malaysia

Question : How To Run a PT Program

Is there adequate needs in the identified area for a PT Program?

Yes

Should my organization run the PT Program?

Yes

What should my organization do in running a PT Program?

A

PT Program Details

PT Program Field : MicrobiologyTest : Detection of Coliform and E-coliSample : Drinking Water

AssumptionOf significant priority Enough resources Technology is well understood and implemented

A

22 | P a g e


Question : How To Run a PT ProgramWhat should my organization do in running a PT Program?

Step 2 : Documentation

Step 1 : Design PT Program

Step 3 : Sample handling & distribution

Step 4 : Sample dispatch by subcontractor

Step 5 : Reporting results by laboratories

Step 6 : Analyse results

Step 7 : Generate Report

Step 9 : Improvement Activities

Step 8 : Send Report to customer

PT Program Detail

Design PT Program Number of participating laboratories – 50 Frequency of program – once a yearNumber of sample : 2Sample type : split level pairsStatistical Design : z-scoreDistribution of sample : Rapid distribution (courier)Sample testing within 5 days (participants)

Step 1

PT Program Detail

DocumentationInformation for participants on the PT program : Duration, Fees etc. Invitation Letter, registration formInstruction Sheet (Test and sample handling)Report Form

Step 2

23 | P a g e


PT Program Detail

Sample handling and distribution Arrange for accredited subcontractor to provide standardised test sample, ready for distribution.Request homogenity and stability data upon dispatch of samplesTerms of Reference with subcontractor

Step 3

PT Program Detail

Sample dispatch by subcontractor Provide accurate information on laboratories to subcontractor.Rapid distribution

Step 4

PT Program Detail

Reporting results by laboratories 5 days for testing2 weeks for reporting resultsResults to be sent via e-mail / fax

Step 5

Analyse results Analyse data by PT Provider – 6 weeksInclude comments from technical advisor

Step 6

24 | P a g e


PT Program Detail

Generate Report Generate report within 1 week

Step 7

Send Report Send report to customerObtain feedbacks

Step 8

Improvement activitiesFuture plan based on feedbacks and lesson learntTrend analysis

Step 9

Interlaboratory Comparison Input Table

Activities Start Date End Date Duration

Design Program 01/01/2008 14/01/2008 2 weeks

Documentation 15/01/2008 21/01/2008 1 week

Arrangement with subcontractor 15/01/2008 21/01/2008 1 week

Sample handling by subcontractor 22/01/2008 28/01/2008 1 week

Sample dispatch by subcontractor 29/01/2008 02/02/2008 5 days

Testing Period 03/02/2008 09/02/2008 1 week

Reporting Result 10/02/2008 23/02/2008 2 weeks

Analyse Result 24/02/2008 07/04/2008 6 weeks

Generate Report 08/04/2008 14/04/2008 1 week

Training Module 3: Basic Program Statistics This session provided basic statistical knowledge for PT programs: Z‐score, Interquartile Range, etc. Detailed content can be found in the Course Notes prepared by Mr. Philip Briggs.

25 | P a g e

The 2nd APLAC/PTB Proficiency Testing Training Course & Workshop 11 – 13 September 2007, Melia Hanoi Hotel, Vietnam Planning of National / Regional PT Programs

Introduction Mr. John Gilmour, PTB consultant, gave an introduction to the Planning of National / Regional PT Programs. The objective of the workshop was to provide participants with a sound theoretical knowledge of the management of proficiency testing programs of various kinds. This would include all aspects of administration and the technical requirements, including a reasonable degree of expertise in some useful statistical treatments of PT data. Each economy will have a chance to participate in planning, implementing, and reporting a PT program. He emphasized that this activity was meant to be an exercise for every participating economy to go through. It was not expected that every economy has to run a PT program. He suggested to the participants to select 4‐5 PT programs which were simple enough to enable all those economies, which are interested, to join. The selected PT programs are supposed to be for the purpose of training only. The main objective would be not to run a perfect PT program but to learn from the implementation process.

Brainstorming from Participants The participants decided to plan the PT programs according to technical areas rather than geographical groupings. Each economy was asked what it could offer in each respective PT program. This commitment could lead from being the PT provider, responsible for sample preparation, logistics, communication, coordination etc., taking the role of a coordinator or only offering testing laboratories to participate in a respective PT program. Six PT programs were proposed by the participants as described below. No PT Program PT Provider Contact

Person PT Program

Planning TeamParticipating laboratories

Remarks

1 Medical Testing (Cytology)

Hong Kong Robert Robert Stephen, Bella Patravee

India, Taiwan, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, Australia, Myanmar, China

Hong Kong is able to provide all components of a PT program Participating labs of other economies are not more 3. Malaysia is willing to provide administrative support.

26 | P a g e

The 2nd APLAC/PTB Proficiency Testing Training Course & Workshop 11 – 13 September 2007, Melia Hanoi Hotel, Vietnam No PT Program PT Provider Contact

Person PT Program

Planning TeamParticipating laboratories

Remarks

2 pH‐ value in water

Thailand Rachada Rachada Edita Viengthong Mya Mya Yang Hee Chan Ji Chang Min Sapkota

Korea, Hong Kong, China, Indonesia, Malaysia, Taiwan, Laos, Australia, Nepal, India, Singapore, Vietnam, Myanmar

Require budget support for transportation and material preparation. KOLAS/Korea provides technical advice by chemical experts and statistical experts for analyzing PT results. Maximum number of participating labs is not more than 5 labs each economy.

3 Calibration (mass, temperature, pressure, etc.)

Pakistan Farooq Farooq Siti

Vietnam (length, mass, volume, etc.), Hong Kong, Singapore, China, Australia, India, Taiwan

Malaysia can prepare samples: mass, temperature, electricity; can provide technical support and administrative supports. Australia can offer artifacts for calibration programs.

4 Ultrasonic Testing

Indonesia Sugeng Sugeng Venkateswaran Bibin Philip Ha Tran Thu

India, China, Singapore, Vietnam, Hong Kong

5 Cement Testing (CaO, SO3, etc.)

Vietnam Quan Quan Lee Ham Eng Tian Ling Tsai Zoe

Singapore, China, Australia, Taiwan, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia

6 Steel Testing (tensile, etc.)

Vietnam Quan Quan Hieu Pusadee

India, Australia, Nepal, China, Pakistan, Singapore, Taiwan, Thailand, Malaysia, Hong Kong

Note: Number of participating laboratories of the PT provider Economy is unlimited, whereas, the number of participating laboratories of other economies are limited, depending on the number agreed by each respective PT program group.

27 | P a g e

The 2nd APLAC/PTB Proficiency Testing Training Course & Workshop 11 – 13 September 2007, Melia Hanoi Hotel, Vietnam Additional Information • NABL, India

o Offers labs for participation in all fields of PT programs. o Offer PT programs. o Provide technical advisory for testing and calibration programs. o Provide testing and calibration services. o Provide expertise on homogeneity study. o Offer evaluation of results and analysis of data, z‐score, En Ratio, etc.

• Pakistan o In need of PT in the field of ‘Pesticide Residue’.

• Vietnam o Offer PT providers for Coal Testing (S, ash, etc.), Cement Testing (CaO, SO3,

etc.), and Steel Testing (tensile, etc.) o Offer the role and functions of coordinator, data analysis, and participating

labs. o Needs:

Medical Testing Pharmaceutical Testing Petroleum Testing Seed Testing Calibration (mass, etc.)

o Hieu offers tensile testing, calculation, printing out the reports and dispatching.

• Nepal o At this stage, some participating laboratories can be identified to test received

sample from elsewhere (trace element analysis in water).

PT Program Planning Team to Develop an Operational Plan Out of the 6 PT programs proposed to be used as a training exercise for the workshop participants, 5 PT program planning teams were formed to develop an operational plan for the implementation of each PT program. Cement and Steel Testing program teams are working in one group. The members of the PT program planning team are listed below. No PT Program PT Program Planning Team Members Economy 1 Medical Testing Robert, Stephen, Bella

Patravee Hong Kong Thailand

2 pH‐ value in water Rachada Edita Viengthong Mya Mya Yang Hee Chan, Ji Chang Min Sapkota

Thailand Australia Laos Myanmar Korea Nepal

28 | P a g e

The 2nd APLAC/PTB Proficiency Testing Training Course & Workshop 11 – 13 September 2007, Melia Hanoi Hotel, Vietnam No PT Program PT Program Planning Team Members Economy 3 Calibration Farooq

Siti Pakistan Malaysia

4 Ultrasonic Testing Sugeng Venkateswaran, Bibin Philip Ha Tran Thu

Indonesia India Vietnam

5 Cement and Steel Testing

Quan, Hieu Pusadee Lee Ham Eng Tian Ling Tsai Zoe

Vietnam Thailand Singapore China Taiwan

Operational Plans for the PT Programs An operational plan is meant to be a tool for the implementation of the selected PT programs. The plans cover a period of one year from the 2nd PT training course & workshop until the 3rd PT training workshop. The PT operation plans attached to this report have been preliminary developed during the 2nd PT training workshop and a few weeks after the workshop. The plans might be adjusted to the changed situations when implementation proceeds. The operational plans for each PT program are in ANNEX 3. The operational plan of each PT program should be sent to the moderator within a week after the workshop. The operational plans will be incorporated in the workshop report, which will be submitted to APLAC and PTB within 2 weeks after the workshop. The workshop report will be posted to the APLAC website for the members to download. The estimation of the budget needed to run the PT program is part of the implementation process. Request for financial support are to be addressed to Mr. Philip Briggs. For detailed funding procedure, please look at the APLAC Funding Manual on the APLAC website. Contact persons for APLAC is Mr. Philip Briggs and for PTB is Dr. Ulrich Diekmann.

Homework and Future Steps (Provided by Mr. John Gilmour) At the conclusion of the workshop, it was agreed that a range of practical PT exercises would be undertaken by the participants working in small teams and that these would be reported at a third workshop to be conducted in approximately twelve months time. It was recognized that not all participants would be in a position to make commitments on behalf of their organizations on the level of participation in these practical exercises that could be expected but that all would endeavour to ensure that there would be some reasonable participation in at least one exercise, recognizing that participation would vary

29 | P a g e

The 2nd APLAC/PTB Proficiency Testing Training Course & Workshop 11 – 13 September 2007, Melia Hanoi Hotel, Vietnam from full management of an exercise, participation in the planning, provision of testing materials or artifacts, assistance with sample distribution, facilitating laboratory participation and data analysis and reporting, to any combination of these elements. The purpose of the “homework” is to provide practical experience to test the workshop participants rather than to provide actual proficiency tests for laboratories. To this end, participating laboratories will need to be informed of this objective and their agreement obtained. For instance, it may be necessary to breach normal confidentiality requirements as part of subsequent discussion. Nevertheless, participating laboratories may find it useful to be part of a regional program and be interested in the outcome. Organizations that participated in the workshop are therefore urged to gain maximum benefit from this training program by participating in the exercises to the greatest extent possible. The implementation of the practical PT exercises should be opened for participants from both the 1st and the 2nd PT training course & workshop to participate. The PT provider of each PT program can make an announcement of the PT program offered to the participants of the first workshop and invite for their participation. (Provided by Mr. John Gilmour) Since there will be a gap of twelve months with little or on contact between the APLAC/PTB team and the participants, it is appropriate that opportunities be taken in the interim for at least some of the team and some of the participants to meet occasionally, even informally. In the first instance, the APLAC General Assembly in December will provide an opportunity for discussions in the margins without interfering with the General Assembly and its associated formal meetings. Other opportunities will present themselves during the year as there will be ASEAN and other regional meetings that will involve some of the participants. At the next workshop there will be a focus on the practical aspects of the “homework” but also some further theoretical work.

30 | P a g e

The 2nd APLAC/PTB Proficiency Testing Training Course & Workshop 11 – 13 September 2007, Melia Hanoi Hotel, Vietnam 6. COURSE & WORKSHOP EVALUATION 1. Course objectives and outcomes Yes Probably No a) Were the course objectives clearly explained to you at the

beginning of the course?

b) Do you believe that these course objectives were met?

c) Were you satisfied that the course content had

relevance to your organization and role?

22 3 0

19 6 0

21 4 0

Comments:

• Course was highly informative and useful. • Objectives were excellent but implementation stages are too long. • Excited to expect more inputs in the next workshop. • Specific training courses: Sample Preparation, How to be accessed by AB – PT

provider? 2. Course Delivery Yes Probably No b) Was there enough practical application in the course?

b) Did the activities improve your understanding of the

topic? c) Were the course notes and reference documents

useful? d) Do you think you will use the course notes and

reference documents in future?

22 3 0

22 3 0

24 1 0

24 1 0

Comments:

• Excellent delivery of the course content. • Resource persons were knowledgeable. • It should take about 5 days for the training course.

3. Course Presenters Yes Probably No a) Did the presenters have adequate knowledge of the content?

b) Did the presenters make the course interesting?

c) Was the course well organized?

24 1 0

20 5 0

21 3 0

31 | P a g e

The 2nd APLAC/PTB Proficiency Testing Training Course & Workshop 11 – 13 September 2007, Melia Hanoi Hotel, Vietnam Comments:

• Well organized by the highly experienced experts. • Excellent.

4. Workshop process and design Yes Probably No a) Did you have adequate opportunity to share experiences, ideas

and/or specific needs during the workshop?

b) Was the workshop design flexible enough to address your specific needs?

c) Was the discussion guided in a way that the group best benefited from it?

d) Was the course duration, location, training venue, and other organizational issues well organized?

22 2 1

19 6 0

22 3 0

21 4 0

5. Overall impression Yes Probably No a) Do you think you will be able to implement the knowledge/skills

presented in this course in your workplace?

b) Were your expectations for the course met?

c) Do you think time was well spent?

19 6 0

18 16

18 7 0

6. Further suggestions (e.g. Content, delivery, other courses)

• Some of the topics were not being covered e.g. calculation of z‐score and En ratio. • Include specific requirements, directions, etc. needed for steps to PT program

accreditation. • The workshop was very satisfying so far. The outcomes and benefits to be best

evaluated as the results of PT provision that is to commence. • More lectures from Mr. Philip Briggs is required. Also other information from

experts is required. Time needs to be spent on sharing their experiences also. • Need centralized communication so that all the information can be available by

the single source. • Participants’ details (name, address, organization, etc.) should be prepared well in

advance. • The course may include in‐depth analysis of PT program, especially statistical

techniques used in PT programs. • For the beginner in the field, this has been very helpful and interesting. I gain

more knowledge in the area and more exposed to the requirements of handling a PT program. I would personally like to thank all resource persons whom have been very providing and supportive throughout the program. Thank you very much from Standards Malaysia.

• More practical example / experience from developed country.

32 | P a g e


• Should inform us earlier and mention to Director to assign the same person who attended the 2nd workshop to attend the 3rd workshop.

• Should extend time to 5 days for more technical in‐depth content. • New participants should also be given information on the homework and to gather

some statistics for presentation. Clearer explanation on ‘priority’ allocation may be helpful.

33 | P a g e

The 2nd APLAC/PTB Proficiency Testing Training Course ... · 08.00 Registration 08.30 ... workshop,...

Documents

Transcript of The 2nd APLAC/PTB Proficiency Testing Training Course ... · 08.00 Registration 08.30 ... workshop,...